(单词翻译:单击)
Hi, I'm Craig, and this is Crash Course Government and Politics
嗨，我是克雷格，这是《政府和政治速成课》。
and today, finally, we are stepping into the big leagues.
今天，我们终于进入了大联盟。
That's right, I'm trying out for the Cubs.
没错，我在为大学生篮球超级联赛试水。
No, we're gonna talk about how the Supreme Court of the United States actually works!
不，我们要谈谈美国最高法院是如何运作的!
I could try out for the Cubs right, Stan?
我可以试试大学生篮球超级联赛对吧，斯坦?
Sometimes people refer to it by the unfortunate nickname S.C.O.T.U.S but I'm not gonna do it, I'm gonna call it the supreme cocoa, or cocoa supreme.
有时人们用“s.c.o.t.u”这个不幸的绰号来称呼它但是我不会这么做，我要把它叫做至尊可可，或者可可至尊。
Now, let's just be respectful.
现在，让我们放尊重些。
So strap in and get ready for some highly technical discussion of procedure as we learn how you, yes you, probably not you, can bring a case to the Supreme Court.
所以，系好安全带，准备进行一些高技术的程序讨论，因为我们知道你，是的，你，可能不是你，可以将案件提交到最高法院。
The first thing you need to take a case to the Supreme Court is a case,
你要向最高法院起诉的第一件事就是，
or controversy, and except in certain rare situations where the court has original jurisdiction,
或争议，除非在某些罕见的情况下法院有最初的管辖权，
that case has to have already heard and decided by a lower court and appealed.
该案件必须已经听取了下级法院的意见并作出了判决并提出上诉。
And not just once;
并且不止一次
before a case gets to the Supreme Court you have to have exhausted your appeals at lower levels of the state or federal system.
在案件到达最高法院之前，你必须用尽你在州或联邦系统较低层级的上诉。
If you've lost your previous appeals but still think that you have an issue worthy of the court's attention,
如果你输掉了之前的上诉但仍然认为你有一个值得法院注意的问题，
you can petition for a writ of certiorari, which people in the know call “the cert”;
你可以申请调卷令，知情人士称之为“证书”;
'cause they're keepin' it cash...which is short for casual.
因为他们把钱存起来了……这是休闲的缩写。
For a look at how the court chooses its cases, let's go to the Thought Bubble, or the thobub.
为了了解法院是如何选择案件的，让我们来看看思想泡泡，或者说是那些废话。
Lot of nicknames today, Stan!
今天有很多绰号，斯坦！ST
Certiorari is a formal request that the Supreme Court hear your case, but petitioning for a writ is no guarantee of anything.
调卷是要求最高法院审理你的案件的正式请求，但申请令状并不能保证什么。
The federal government's chief lawyer, the solicitor general, is basically like a bouncer at a hot club, if you're old enough to get into a hot club.
联邦政府的首席律师，总检察长，基本上就像夜店的保镖，如果你足够大，可以进入夜店的话。
They screen out a lot of petitions because those cases don't raise a lot of federal law questions
他们过滤掉了大量的请愿书，因为这些案件不会引发很多联邦法律问题
or because they've already been decided in other cases,
或者因为他们已经在其他案件中做出了决定，
or they're not wearing good enough shoes to get into the club.
或者他们穿的鞋不够好，进不了俱乐部。
If, and it's a big if, your petition is granted, it goes into the cert pool –
如果，这是一个很大的如果，你的申请被批准，进入确定处理组-
the first round in which the justices decide which cases they're actually going to decide.
第一轮法官决定他们将会决定哪些案件。
The list of cases that will be decided is called the discussion list.
将要决定的案例列表称为讨论列表。
For the judges to actually hear the case, called granting certiorari, 4 of the 9 justices have to agree to hear it.
为了让法官真正审理这个被称为移送案卷的案件，9名法官中有4名必须同意审理。
This is called the rule of 4.
这就是所谓的4法则。
The discussion of the discussion list and decision about whether or not to grant certiorari happens at the conference, which is like the back of the club where the really well-dressed people go.
关于讨论清单的讨论以及是否授予调卷权的决定都是在会议上进行的，就像穿着考究的人去俱乐部的后面一样。
So the judges have read your petition and 4 of them have decided that your case is one of about 80 that they will hear, congratulations!
所以法官们已经读了你的请愿书，其中4人认为你的案件是他们将会听到的80个案件之一，恭喜你!
Now you, and the side that disagrees with your position, have to submit briefs.
现在，你和不同意你立场的一方必须提交简报。
Briefs are not underwear;
简报不是内裤；
briefs are written legal arguments from each side explaining why the law favors their position.
简报是双方的书面法律论据，解释法律为什么有利于他们的立场。
The party bringing the case seeking to overturn the lower court decision is the petitioner.
呈请人是提出申请推翻下级法院裁决的案件的一方。
The party that wants the court to uphold or affirm the lower court's decision is called the respondent.
希望法院支持或确认下级法院判决的一方称为被告。
The petitioner also files a reply, which attempts to rebut the respondent, which is not a euphemism.
呈请人也提出答复，试图反驳被申请人，这不是委婉的说法。
After filing all this, you're finally on your way out of the Thought Bubble.
在整理完所有这些之后，你终于走出了思想泡泡。
I mean you're on your way to court.
我是说你在去法院的路上。
Thanks Thought Bubble.
由于认为泡沫。
You might think that there would only be two briefs in a case, one from each side, and it's true that there must be at least two.
你可能会认为一个案例中只有两份摘要，每一方都有一份，而且必须至少有两份。
But often there are many, many more briefs, and even boxer briefs!
但是通常会有很多很多简报，甚至是“四角内裤”!
That's what Stan wears.
斯坦就是这么穿的。
Stan put your pants on!
斯坦，穿上你的裤子!
All undergarments aside, individuals or groups who are not actually parties to the case,
除内衣外，并非本案当事人的个人或团体，
but have an interest in the outcome can also file amicus curiae, or friend of the court briefs.
但对结果有兴趣的人也可以提交法庭之友或法庭之友的摘要。
Amicus briefs often contain different legal, economic,
法庭之友的摘要通常包含不同的法律、经济、
or historical arguments that can sometimes persuade justices and appear in their opinions.
或者历史上的观点，这些观点有时能说服法官，并出现在他们的意见中。
They are also one way that interest groups can attempt to influence the Supreme Court.
这也是利益集团试图影响最高法院的一种方式。
After the briefs have been filed, the court schedules oral arguments, giving them time to read and consider the briefs.
摘要提交后，法庭安排口头辩论，让他们有时间阅读和审议摘要。
Each side gets half an hour to make its case,
每一方都有半个小时的时间来陈述自己的观点，
but this time includes questions from the justices, so most of the time it's usually spent answering questions.
但这一次包括法官的提问，所以大部分时间都是用来回答问题的。
Imagine a presentation with the most intense teacher you've ever had bombarding you with questions, except that there 9 teachers!
想象一下，一场演讲中，你遇到的最紧张的老师用问题轰炸你，只有9位老师例外!
Well, 8 because Clarence Thomas never speaks.
因为克拉伦斯·托马斯从来不说话。
After oral arguments, you wait for a decision.
在口头辩论之后，你等待一个决定。
The justices then meet in another conference which is held on a Wednesday or a Friday, 'cause there's good TV the other days.
然后法官们在周三或周五召开另一个会议，因为前几天有很好的电视节目。
In order for the court to render an official decision, 5 of the 9 justices, a majority must agree on at least one of the legal arguments that either affirms or overturns the lower court's decision.
为了让最高法院做出正式裁决，9名大法官中有5名必须在至少一项法律论点上达成一致，这些论点要么肯定下级法院的裁决，要么推翻下级法院的裁决。
Although they can also send a case back down to the lower court for another decision, which is called a remand.
尽管他们也可以将案件发回下级法院进行另一项判决，即还押。
Although, you might call it... a punt!
尽管，你可以称之为……赌博
That was like 30 yards.
大概30码。
The chief justice presides over the conference and assigns the task of writing the court's decision, called the majority opinion.
最高法院首席大法官主持会议，并指定撰写最高法院的决定，即“多数意见”。
The opinions are given in writing, although sometimes justices will read them from the bench.
意见以书面形式提出，尽管有时法官会在法官席上宣读意见。
Sometimes the court will issue a single majority opinion which is a very strong statement of unified agreement.
有时法院会发布单一多数意见，这是一个非常强有力的统一意见声明。
In the key civil rights case of Brown v. Board of Education, the court issued a single opinion that was even stronger because it was unanimous.
在关键的民权案件布朗和教育委员会的案件中，法院发布了一个意见，这个意见更有说服力，因为它是一致的。
But sometimes the court will issue multiple opinions on the same case.
但有时法院会就同一案件发表多种意见。
The decision of the court either to affirm or overturn the lower court's ruling is called 'the holding',
法院确认或推翻下级法院裁决的决定被称为“裁定”，
and this is the first thing you need to know in any Supreme Court decision.
这是你需要知道的第一件事在最高法院的任何裁决。
The second thing that matters is the legal reasoning, or rationale, behind the holding.
第二件重要的事情是控股背后的法律推理或理由。
If a justice agrees with the holding in the majority opinion, but for different legal reasons, they write a concurring opinion.
如果法官同意大多数人的意见，但出于不同的法律原因，他们会写一份表示同意的意见。
The rationale in this concurrence is cool and everything, but the lower courts do not need to follow it.
这种一致的理由很酷，什么都有，但是下级法院不需要遵循它。
Only the holding of the majority and its rationale are binding on lower courts.
只有多数派的裁定及其理由对下级法院具有约束力。
A single justice writes a concurrence, but other justices can sign onto it if they agree with its logic.
一位法官写了一份意见书，但其他法官如果同意其逻辑，可以在上面签字。
For instance, the eagle and I both agree that fish are delicious, but I would write a concurrence that the scales and the eyeballs are gross.
举个例子，老鹰和我都认为鱼很好吃，但我也认为鱼鳞和眼球很恶心。
It's unlikely this will go to the Supreme Court though.
不过，这不太可能提交最高法院。
Let's solve it now.
现在我们来解它。
Problem solved.
问题解决了。
Many Supreme Court cases are not unanimous.
许多最高法院的案件并不是一致通过的。
In fact, in an ideologically divided court, you are likely to find a lot of cases decided by 5 to 4 margins.
事实上，在一个意识形态分裂的法庭上，你很可能会发现很多案件以5比4的差额判决。
The judges who are on the losing side who didn't support the majority decision can write a dissenting opinion.
败选一方的法官如果不支持多数人的决定，可以提出异议。
A dissent does not set a precedent for a lower court and has no force of law,
异议不能为下级法院开创先例，也没有法律效力，
but often dissents are very eloquent and they can provide arguments that might persuade later courts in similar decisions.
但持不同意见的人往往很有说服力，他们可以提供论据，说服后来的法院做出类似的判决。
Sometimes, as with the famously bad case of Plessy v. Ferguson, the arguments in a dissent can form the foundation for the majority opinion in a later case,
有时，就像普莱西诉弗格森一案那样，持不同意见的人提出的论点可能会成为后来多数人意见的基础，
even though it can take 50 years to get from a case like Plessy to Brown v. Board of Education.
尽管从普莱西案到布朗诉教育委员会案可能需要50年的时间。
So that's the nuts and bolts of how Supreme Court decisions are made.
这就是最高法院如何做出裁决的具体细节。
But before we wrap this up, here are a few key things to remember.
但在我们结束之前，有一些关键的事情需要记住。
First, there are a lot of hurdles you need to jump over before a court makes a decision in a case.
首先，在法庭做出判决之前，你需要跨越很多障碍。
Most certiorari petitions, there are usually about 8,000 each year, don't make it past the clerks or the solicitor general, and don't get granted.
大多数调卷申请，通常每年大约有8000份，不要通过书记官或副检察长的审查，也不要被批准。
It takes 4 judges to agree to hear a case, but 5 to render a majority opinion.
同意审理一个案件需要4名法官，但提出多数意见需要5名法官。
Only the holding and the rationale supported by at least 5 of the 9 justices becomes binding precedent for lower courts.
只有9名大法官中至少5名支持的裁定和理由，才成为下级法院具有约束力的先例。
Dissents and concurrences may be fun and interesting to read, especially if there are pictures,
不同意和同意读起来可能很有趣，特别是如果有图片的话，
and they may include important legal ideas, but lower courts don't need to follow them.
它们可能包含重要的法律理念，但下级法院不需要遵循这些理念。
So that's how to court works procedurally, but there's another way to think about Supreme Court decision-making.
这就是法院程序化运作的方式，但还有另一种思考最高法院决策的方式。
To really understand the Supreme Court, we need to consider the thinking behind judicial decisions, but that's for another episode.
要真正理解最高法院，我们需要考虑司法裁决背后的思考，但那是另一集的内容。
Thanks for watching.
感谢收看。
Crash Course is produced in association with PBS Digital Studios.
《政府与政治速成课》是与PBS数字工作室联合制作的。
Support for Crash Course US Government comes from Voqal.
对《美国政府速成班》的支持来自Voqal。
Government comes from Voqal.
政府来自Voqal.
Voqal supports nonprofits that use technology and media to advance social equity.
Voqal支持利用技术和媒体促进社会公平的非营利组织。
Learn more about their mission and initiatives at voqal.org.
在Voqal.org了解更多关于他们的使命和倡议。
Crash Course was made with the help of these cocoa supremes.
《速成班》是在这些可可至上主义者的帮助下制作的。
Thanks for watching.
谢谢收看。
